CEPPWAWU and Others v Metrofile (Pty) Limited (JA37/01) [2003] ZALAC 22; [2004] 2 BLLR 103 (LAC); (2004) 25 ILJ 231 (LAC) (19 December 2003)

CEPPWAWU and Others v Metrofile (Pty) Limited (JA37/01) [2003] ZALAC 22; [2004] 2 BLLR 103 (LAC); (2004) 25 ILJ 231 (LAC) (19 December 2003)

The Labour Appeal Court found that the respondent's differentiation between Gowie and Crown strikers was not supported by the evidence. Both groups engaged in similar misconduct, and the respondent failed to provide a factual basis for treating them differently. The parity principle requires that employees who commit similar offences be treated equally, and the respondent's selective dismissal was inconsistent and arbitrary. The dismissals of the Gowie employees, seven Crown employees, and Lewis were substantively unfair, while the dismissals of Lawson and Tlabiyane were upheld due to their involvement in violence and intimidation. The disciplinary process during the strike was found to...

Citation
[2003] ZALAC 22
Parties
Appellant: CEPPWAWU; Appellant: B Lawson and Others; Respondent: Metrofile (Pty) Limited
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 December 2003
Case Number
JA37/01
Procedural Posture
Labour Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal both succeed. The order of the Labour Court is set aside and replaced.
Judges
D Mlambo, RMM Zondo, EL Goldstein
Legal Topics
Strike Related Misconduct, Selective Dismissal, Parity Principle, Disciplinary Procedure, Protected Strike, Reinstatement
Labour Law Strike Related Misconduct Selective Dismissal Parity Principle Disciplinary Procedure Protected Strike Reinstatement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CEPPWAWU

Appellant

B Lawson and Others

Appellant

Metrofile (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the Gowie and certain Crown employees for strike-related misconduct was substantively fair.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's differentiation between Gowie and Crown strikers constituted unfair selective dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the disciplinary process during the strike was procedurally fair.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court found that the respondent's differentiation between Gowie and Crown strikers was not supported by the evidence. Both groups engaged in similar misconduct, and the respondent failed to provide a factual basis for treating them differently. The parity principle requires that employees who commit similar offences be treated equally, and the respondent's selective dismissal was inconsistent and arbitrary. The dismissals of the Gowie employees, seven Crown employees, and Lewis were substantively unfair, while the dismissals of Lawson and Tlabiyane were upheld due to their involvement in violence and intimidation. The disciplinary process during the strike was found to...

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal both succeed. The order of the Labour Court is set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • The dismissal of the second to further applicants, including Mchunu and excluding B Lawson and M Tlabiyane, is found to be substantively unfair but procedurally fair.
  • The second to further applicants, including Mchunu and excluding B Lawson and M Tlabiyane, are reinstated from the date of this order.